QuoteReplyTopic: Why do so many bands do just one double album?! Posted: March 14 2014 at 17:23

Just as it says in the title, why are there so many bands (especially in prog rock) that decide to do one double/very stocky album, and then not do another for a long time or ever again? Did they think that it was a mistake (as it wasn't in most cases) or did they spend too much money on it? Neither seem likely, so why does this happen?!?! Some examples of this are:

Anyhow, back to the OP, I think the answer as to why they did not do many double albums was a simple question of logistics, cost, and time. Also, don't forget, most of these bands were almost permanently on the road, so recording time was rather precious.

Anyhow, back to the OP, I think the answer as to why they did not do many double albums was a simple question of logistics, cost, and time. Also, don't forget, most of these bands were almost permanently on the road, so recording time was rather precious.

They were also expensive to buy so sold fewer copies, the record companies didn't like that because that meant they did chart well, and high chart placing always result in even more sales.

If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman

^Sorry, but the first LP of Genesis i bought in 1981 was also double - "...and then there were three"

Unless this is a joke I do not understand, my copy of A TTWT, purchased on vinyl, was a singe LP.

Quite surprised hearing that from you, because at least from mine i used to read A LOT all the lyrics ON THE TWO INTERIOR SIDES of it, taking for granted my interest in the english language. It seems this LP releasing was better in my country indeed.

^Sorry, but the first LP of Genesis i bought in 1981 was also double - "...and then there were three"

I

Unless this is a joke I do not understand, my copy of A TTWT, purchased on vinyl, was a singe LP.

Quite surprised hearing that from you, because at least from mine i used to read A LOT all the lyrics ON THE TWO INTERIOR SIDES of it, taking for granted my interest in the english language. It seems this LP releasing was better in my country indeed.

^Sorry, but the first LP of Genesis i bought in 1981 was also double - "...and then there were three"

Unless this is a joke I do not understand, my copy of ATTWT, purchased on vinyl, was a singe LP.

Yeah, it's only 50 minutes, and is a single LP. You might have some other edition? I don't know. The Lamb is 94 or something, so it's much stockier than ATTWT, and a double.

Also, Ummagumma was half studio and half live. I see it as 2 different albums really. Even so, there was still a 10 year gap between that and The Wall, and there hasn't been one since then.

P.S. Forgot about Tommy I'll take it out. You get what I mean though

Maybe that's it, it is possibly another edition, but unfortunately i don't have my LP of ATTWT anymore, very silly of mine not having my LPs with me anymore, i had a special affair with the double ones, which if i remember well was at least 90 % of my LPs (including that consisted of one only vynil packed in a double folding cover, like ATTWT. Maybe that's what you were meaning...)

The Who generated "Tommy" and "Quadraphenia," both brilliant works of music! I'm still amazed at how much of the instrumentation the band members played themselves (strings, horns etc.).

Otherwise, I think it tends to be the creative drain as well as lack of support by the industry. Double albums seemed to be trendy for a while....TFTO, The Lamb, Works etc.

This is interesting: Some artists still occasionally produce a large enough quantity of material to justify a double album. For example, progressive rock band The Flower Kings have released four double albums out of eleven studio albums.

It appears that many bands would capture entire concerts and release them as live double albums, which makes sense since it reduces studio costs & offers the consumer an alternative product to the studio version.

Just as it says in the title, why are there so many bands (especially in prog rock) that decide to do one double/very stocky album, and then not do another for a long time or ever again? Did they think that it was a mistake (as it wasn't in most cases) or did they spend too much money on it? Neither seem likely, so why does this happen?!?!

Nowadays with the CD's being capable of having so much more music, many more albums would be considered "double"!!!!!

LP's had a limit of about 20/22/24 minutes or so for the longest time, so anyone wanting to do anything of an extended nature was at the mercy of the record company and their whims.

Today this is not an issue since you can put 100 minutes on a CD, and guess what ... that's like 2 and a half LP's.

I've mentioned this before. The "double album" thing, created a slight problem. All the symphonies you ever heard by everyone from the last 500 years are now "limited" to the size that the LP has created for them, and I'm waiting to see new recordings of things that follow the music scores, and not the LP subscription of how long it has to be.

One of the greatest things in the digital age is seeing these limitations totally gone. Now i want to hear the original Beethoven symphonies without them being trimmed or strictly "following" a pattern (timewise) that we're familiar with!!!

Wouldn't that be scary?

At the very least this did not happen to "popular music" in its rise to their sales, which is now the "new standard" for what is music and is not! But seeing so many bands these days do long cuts and not be bound by the length is partiularly satisfying for me!

... none of the hits, none of the time ... you might actually find your own art, or self!

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum